Saturday, 30 August 2014

Trial by combat, dispute resolution



It's a trope that appeals to Hollywood. Two great warriors staring one another down before the first move; a highly choreography fight scene, preferably with special effects, then ensues.



How often does the hero have to battle the robot monster from mars alone? Why does no one ever try and help Super Man? Why does MI6 only have one competent spy?

One-on-one combat is deeply embedded across human cultures and comes laden with honour and valour. It was a passage from the 14th century St Albans Chronicle that had me musing upon it this week and wondering when the tradition started. In it, the abbot of Battle Abbey is attempting to defend the town of Rye from the French whom he threatens with eternal damnation, and refuses to permit single combat to take place due to his position and ethics as a religious man (St Albans Chronicle, eds. Taylor and Watkiss, I, pp. 133).

Make love not war and all that.


Judging by the chronicle's evidence, it was still a widely acceptable way of deciding a dispute but I'm sure you're already been reminded of a much more famous instance:

Now the Philistines gathered together their armies to battle, and were gathered together at Shochoh, which belongeth to Judah, and pitched between Shochoh and Azekah, in Ephesdammim.



And Saul and the men of Israel were gathered together, and pitched by the valley of Elah, and set the battle in array against the Philistines.



And the Philistines stood on a mountain on the one side, and Israel stood on a mountain on the other side: and there was a valley between them.



And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span.



And he had an helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail; and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of brass.



And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders.



And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him.



 And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.



If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.



And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.



When Saul and all Israel heard those words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid.


 - Book of Samuel, Chapter 17


Written somewhere around the 7th century BC, we're getting closer to lending some antiquity to this practice. But wait, Troy wasn't just a poor film starring Brad Pitt I hear you cry. No, no it wasn't.


"As he spoke he drew the keen blade that hung so great and strong by his side, and gathering himself together be sprang on Achilles like a soaring eagle which swoops down from the clouds on to some lamb or timid hare--even so did Hector brandish his sword and spring upon Achilles. Achilles mad with rage darted towards him, with his wondrous shield before his breast, and his gleaming helmet, made with four layers of metal, nodding fiercely forward."

 - The Iliad, Book XXII, Chapter 22 



(Pot image above, https://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/online_tours/greece/the_myth_of_the_trojan_war/achilles_fights_hector.aspx)


So famous is this particular example of single combat (written around the 8th century BC) that the British Museum even has examples of 6th century BC merchandise.

Zipping back now all the way to 2000 BC, the Epic of Gilgamesh recounts the meeting of the King Gilgamesh and the wildman Enkidu who was sent to combat Gilgamesh's tyranny:

Strewn is the couch for the love-rites, and Gilgamish (now) in the night-time

Cometh to sleep, to delight in the woman (but) [Enkidu], coming

(There) in the highway, doth block up the passage to Gilgamish, [threat’ning]

He with his strength . . .Burgeon’d [his rage], (and) he rush’d to [attack] him: they met in the highway. Enkidu barr’d up the door with his foot, (and) to Gilgamish entry—



[He] Would not concede: they grappled and snorted(?) like bulls, (and) the threshold

Shatter’d: the (very) wall quiver’d as Gilgamish 1, Enkidu grappled,

Snorting(?) like bulls, (and) the threshold they shatter’d, the (very) wall quiver’d.

 - 2nd Tablet, translated here: http://king-of-heroes.co.uk/the-epic-of-gilgamesh/reginald-campbell-thompson-translation/of-the-meeting-of-gilgamish-and-enkidu/


Which summed up means that Enkidu fought Gilgamesh (elaborate prose is hard when you're writing on stone). The conclusion of the fight is that Gilgamesh sees the error of his ways and repents.

Sources dry up after this and I'm left wondering just when and where the practice did begin. Was it born out of a desire to settle disputes and avoid the suffering of many; or is it instead a primal instinct from our early ancestors, pitted against nature itself for survival, given a romantic twist?



N.B.
I'm not a classicist so do please feel free to correct my google found dates for the pre-medieval sources.

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment